Conspiracy theorists

Discussions about the history of the ship, technical details, etc.
dunmunro
Senior Member
Posts: 3544
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2005 1:25 am
Location: Langley BC Canada

Conspiracy theorists

Post by dunmunro » Fri Jan 19, 2018 2:31 am

One of the hallmarks of a Conspiracy Theorist is that no matter how much evidence is presented the CT's response is too always double down on their insistence that their theory is correct. Any inconsistency in the evidence or "official account" is always held up as proof of the conspiracy when more mundane explanations are much more likely.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conspiracy_theory

OpanaPointer
Member
Posts: 130
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2011 1:00 pm

Re: Conspiracy theorists

Post by OpanaPointer » Fri Jan 19, 2018 2:43 am

There is less confusion if the term "conspiracy advocate" is used. Less likely to make people think "those people" have an actual theory.

User avatar
Antonio Bonomi
Senior Member
Posts: 3573
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy

Re: Conspiracy theorists

Post by Antonio Bonomi » Fri Jan 19, 2018 8:01 am

Hello everybody,

@ Dunmunro,

I am sure you are going to open a similar thread about some " deniers at any cost " of any evidence ... and the " trolling " activity that some persons do on the forums when they have no more arguments to counter, ... not to talk about the ones that starts offending personally other forum members in the useless attempt to try to avoid them to talk about some " sacred cows " arguments.

We do have clear examples of all those type of personalities in this forum ... so think about it.

Bye, Antonio :D
In order to honor a soldier, we have to tell the truth about what happened over there. The whole, hard, cold truth. And until we do that, we dishonor her and every soldier who died, who gave their life for their country. ( Courage Under Fire )

Cag
Senior Member
Posts: 577
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2015 9:53 am

Re: Conspiracy theorists

Post by Cag » Fri Jan 19, 2018 10:06 am

Hi All

May I say we don't really want to start accusing people of being anything do we?

The idea of conspiracy advocates or deniers at all costs gets us no where. Opinion is opinion and everyone is allowed to express that opinion without ridicule. Nor do we really need accusations of trolling, especially from those that have on occaission trolled themselves.

You cannot really say that when you post against other views etc it's 'robust argument' but when someone else does the same it's trolling. That is surely hypocrisy.

Maybe common sense and discussion should prevail.

Best wishes

User avatar
Antonio Bonomi
Senior Member
Posts: 3573
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy

Re: Conspiracy theorists

Post by Antonio Bonomi » Fri Jan 19, 2018 10:35 am

Hello everybody,

@ CAG,

you are simply asking what I have been asking since the very beginning of this subject discussion unsuccessfully.

The post's you can read on those threads starting May 2013 can only confirm what I am stated above.

It appears evident that once left with no valid arguments anymore, ... this is the way some like to take.

Bye Antonio :D
In order to honor a soldier, we have to tell the truth about what happened over there. The whole, hard, cold truth. And until we do that, we dishonor her and every soldier who died, who gave their life for their country. ( Courage Under Fire )

Cag
Senior Member
Posts: 577
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2015 9:53 am

Re: Conspiracy theorists

Post by Cag » Fri Jan 19, 2018 11:29 am

Hi All

Hi Antonio

I can say that after the Leach war cabinet papers, WW engage or not engage, loss of contact and Tovey fuel threads and the constant attacks on these officers I can understand the frustration of Dunmunro and the conspiracy theory charge.

However I can also, to be fair to you and Alberto and Alecsandros, understand your frustration and the denier charges, but I can also see that both "sides" as you call them are guilty of the same charges.

I can see how discussion suddenly becomes argument, but name calling or unfounded accusation (of which I have had my fair share) does not resolve anything.

You have your opinion, I'm happy to accept it, I personally have no axe to grind, I have read threads, found evidence from others and from my research that seems to be at odds with your opinion and so I investigate further. I do not say your opinion is wrong, I put forward evidences or fundemental questions that have to be answered, just like I have to answer counter questions.

I have to be logical and honest in my reasoning, for example

do I believe WW was meant to engage on the morning of the 24th? No there is compelling evidence to say that the opposite is suggested and there is evidence from more than one source, but that is an opinion based on interpretation of those evidences.

do I believe if the battle had lasted longer WW would have attempted to engage? Impossible to answer, I know he did engage on the 27th, I know he was heading directly for Bismarck from 05.53 on the 24th, but no I cannot say he was definitely going to engage, that is an opinion I cannot give as I have no concrete evidence to support it.

We can discuss this and go away with respect for each other and with each other's opinion but not necessarily in agreement, I have no problem in doing so.

The problem begins when I am told I must realise an opinion is right no matter what other evidence does not support it, and if I do not I am naive or worse stupid or a denier at all cost, all of which I have been accused of. I do not respond by calling names, I ask if that kind of behaviour is appropriate.

But then I also ask if I produce a valid question, that logically is relevant and it is denied its relevance by use of accusation of naivety or being unintelligent or trolling etc is that not similarly a denial?

So there are multiple deniers, and the silly games, tactics, etc etc go on and on and no one gets anywhere, that's why so many people leave the discussion, which to be really honest I truly wish I'd never even gotten involved in as nothing is ever resolved, at points we've gotten close but then accusations fly and it's closed down and we all lose.

If you have your opinion, and I have mine let's agree to disagree and discuss something less controversial.

Best wishes
Cag.

OpanaPointer
Member
Posts: 130
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2011 1:00 pm

Re: Conspiracy theorists

Post by OpanaPointer » Fri Jan 19, 2018 11:36 am

I met my first advocate in 1965. He had bought all the Pearl Harbor Attack Hearings volumes from the GPO and got me to read them, looking for the "smoking gun".* I had to tell I couldn't find one. "Well,it's in there somewhere!"

Since then I've learned to address the issue, not the speaker. This saves me from trying to determine if the speaker is a "true believer", "somewhat misinformed", or simple "trolling". For the histrionic personalities it removes their name from my post, for the "somewhat misinformed" it saves them embarrassment.

Of course I'm not perfect, but I try to adhere to that policy as much as I can. I also have a sign over my monitor. "You have to give someone permission to make you angry."

Cag
Senior Member
Posts: 577
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2015 9:53 am

Re: Conspiracy theorists

Post by Cag » Fri Jan 19, 2018 11:59 am

Hi All

Hi OpanaPointer,

Funnily enough my first ever research was into the loss of PoW and Repulse, I too found apparent evidence that Roosevelt and Churchill discussed the forthcoming Pearl Harbour attack on the scrambler telephone and read the transcript of that conversation which had been found in the Bundesarchiv as the scrambler telephone was intercepted and unscrambled.

I spoke to a lovely old lady who had operated the scrambler switchboard who told me how often she interrupted calls to remind those speaking not to mention war critical info such as German bombing of cities, merchant losses etc as the scrambler was not secure, this included Churchill.

I then corresponded with a very helpful gentleman in the relevant department in the Bundesarchiv who confirmed transcripts were held of British scrambler telephone conversations but he had no records of any conversations between two such eminent men about an attack on Pearl Harbour or had found evidence that anything was missing.

In the end I guess controversy sells and you cannot liable the dead, but i also think we do this at what cost?

Best wishes
Cag.

User avatar
Antonio Bonomi
Senior Member
Posts: 3573
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy

Re: Conspiracy theorists

Post by Antonio Bonomi » Fri Jan 19, 2018 12:23 pm

Hello everybody,

@ CAG,

you wrote :
If you have your opinion, and I have mine let's agree to disagree ...
I have never had any problem about it with anybody, ... this is my way to do things when we have different opinions, ... and consequently I cannot agree more with your above initial statement.
... and discuss something less controversial.
This is part of the problem as far as I can see with some persons here in.

I am free to write and research about anything I want and like, especially when supported by documents and valid source references and deeply analyzing arguments I like to discover more about.

If somebody does not like it he can avoid to respond and go discussing other topics on another thread or forum.

No one has the right to offend me and become sarcastic by " trolling " my post's.

It is against this forum rules and mostly it is a very poor personal way to act no matter what.

I research and write about history and use available documents and books, ... if one likes to do that it is welcome, ... any other approach used to defend at any cost a pre-conceived view is not welcome.

Bye Antonio :D
In order to honor a soldier, we have to tell the truth about what happened over there. The whole, hard, cold truth. And until we do that, we dishonor her and every soldier who died, who gave their life for their country. ( Courage Under Fire )

Cag
Senior Member
Posts: 577
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2015 9:53 am

Re: Conspiracy theorists

Post by Cag » Fri Jan 19, 2018 12:59 pm

Hi All

Hi Antonio,

Please believe that I respect you and your work, I'm afraid that no one has the right to assert an opinion as a fact and expect to face no opposition if there are fundemental questions that they will not answer, I certainly believe that no one has the right to offend anyone full stop.

But also no one has the right to name call and disrespect others but expect full respect in return, or assert their right to "robustly argue" a point and yet call it trolling if they face the same thing. If you live by the sword, what is good for the goose etc etc etc.

I'm not here to engage in yet another heated argument that ends up in accusation and nothing being resolved. I'm here to discuss, be objective, be questioned and to question.

You must admit that you have set out, to put it mildly, to question Leach and Wake-Walker in repeated threads, to call into question their fighting spirit, to try to link your own personal critisism on certain actions with threatened court martial for other actions.

You have provided information details and evidence that have more than one interpretation, each of which is valid. Others have provided equally forthright evidence and opinion. The controversy is the assertion that one side is right, and the other side are simply deniers, when it is all based on opinion interpretation etc, and there is evidence in plain sight that pre conceived ideas are not confined to one party.

Best wishes
Cag.

OpanaPointer
Member
Posts: 130
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2011 1:00 pm

Re: Conspiracy theorists

Post by OpanaPointer » Fri Jan 19, 2018 3:53 pm

Cag wrote:Hi All

Hi OpanaPointer,

Funnily enough my first ever research was into the loss of PoW and Repulse, I too found apparent evidence that Roosevelt and Churchill discussed the forthcoming Pearl Harbour attack on the scrambler telephone and read the transcript of that conversation which had been found in the Bundesarchiv as the scrambler telephone was intercepted and unscrambled.
Best wishes
Cag.
Anybody can make shit up, of course.

You're speaking of the LIHOP (Let It Happen On Purpose) idiocy. This means FDR had two choices:

1. LIHOP and accept a defeat in the Pacific of epic proportions in order to get into a war in the Pacific that would hopefully lead to a world-wide battle front with a crippled Navy. If this was his choice he had to have decided that the information about him taking this choice would never, ever get out.

2. IF he knew he could set up the US Fleet in Hawaii to receive and thoroughly pummel the Japanese raiders, give the US a victory to start the war. He would have to decide that a defeat was better than a victory. A few decades of reading about FDR doesn't give me the impression he would operate in that fashion.

OpanaPointer
Member
Posts: 130
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2011 1:00 pm

Re: Conspiracy theorists

Post by OpanaPointer » Fri Jan 19, 2018 3:53 pm

For reference, there is no natural law that says all opinions are equal.

Cag
Senior Member
Posts: 577
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2015 9:53 am

Re: Conspiracy theorists

Post by Cag » Fri Jan 19, 2018 4:43 pm

Hi All

Hi OpanaPointer,

Yes that's it, when I first came across that it seemed illogical and unbelievable. Just a little bit of research, and I must admit I am no expert nor am I as accomplished as other forum members in this respect, and I found it was just as you describe it. There was no substance to it.

Here I am happy to accept anyone's view, I hope I might be of some use on the forum by asking questions if there are questions that need asking. To try in a small way to point out different interpretations or evidence that is relevant and may allow us to see things from a different viewpoint.

Facts are important as they are really all we have, even facts can be interpreted differently. But I'm not a big fan of finding a truth, as truth is sometimes unintentionally dependant on our own personal prejudice or belief which is no doubt different to everyone else's.

On the morning of May 24th some on Bismarck believed the truth was that they were fighting for Germanys restoration of honour and a struggle for Lebensraum against those that would seek to deny that.

On the British ship some held a different truth.

This is a great forum with great members, sadly it all seems to go a bit wrong when discussion becomes argument and accusation.

Best wishes
Cag.

OpanaPointer
Member
Posts: 130
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2011 1:00 pm

Re: Conspiracy theorists

Post by OpanaPointer » Fri Jan 19, 2018 4:57 pm

Some people don't like to be challenged in their dearly held beliefs. I find that type entertaining.

User avatar
Antonio Bonomi
Senior Member
Posts: 3573
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy

Re: Conspiracy theorists

Post by Antonio Bonomi » Fri Jan 19, 2018 6:03 pm

Hello everybody,

@ CAG,

I have started being addressed by personal offenses by an " hooligan " as soon as I have started the thread " Articles of War " on May 2013.

I had been addressed by any type of sarcastic type of comments when I was only trying to make my point very fairly and in a very educated and polite way.

I have been targeted by threats of legal actions if I was going to publish my works.

You can even find a very recent threat of something similar being written once again by a poor person left with no arguments anymore, a person that when it was the case to say yes or no about a very simple geometrical figure confirmation, ... simply refused to answer and run away from that thread, ... to come back on other threads and restart his lately endless trolling activity.

Please do not put on the same level who is just trying to work on history and serious researches with who does not want that to be done on certain arguments no matter what.

This thread title tells the whole story.

Someone is trying to discredit a serious historical research that was also done superficially by many British historians many years ago, ... with a new theory of conspiracy.

Sorry, ... the Court Martial attempt threat for 2 Royal Navy Officers on 1941 is not a theory, ... is something that really happened and has been confirmed and published on almost all books regarding the Bismarck chase operation starting 1948 until today, ... so for almost 70 years now.
You know well who was Stephen Roskill and what was his job after the war. He was the Official Royal Navy historian for World War 2. Just his position about all this should be enough to close this useless debate we are having here now.

The historical study associated with it is all based on available official documents still available and I pretend respect for my work.

I respect other opinions, ... and I pretend respect for my one, ... no more sarcasm and offenses will be tolerated by me.

If one does not like the argument, ... just get out from here and take a walk ... or go and drink a good beer in the pub.

Bye Antonio :D
In order to honor a soldier, we have to tell the truth about what happened over there. The whole, hard, cold truth. And until we do that, we dishonor her and every soldier who died, who gave their life for their country. ( Courage Under Fire )

Post Reply